CanonFanBoy said:
chauncey said:
Of all the death and destruction going on in this world since the creation of mankind...
you're worried about bugs. Get your priorities straight.
Not really, or they wouldn't drive.
It makes people feel good to say they care by not approving of little things compared to the big things they do everyday.
Just think of the billions of insects killed building the Canon factories and warehouses, all those people getting to work everyday, the ships and planes and trucks murdering still billions more to distribute the product, and then the drive to the shop to get our gear.
Then we have ethics discussions about the minute... extremely minute numbers of insects that might be harmed taking macro shots. Hmmm... wonder what the effect of flash is on the poor things. Maybe it blinds them and they can't see a predator coming along to eat them? maybe you macro folks worried about this ought to leave the bugs alone altogether? It must scare the poops out of them having that big eye with the bright lights disturbing their habitat.
It is a real silly discussion isn't it? Hypocritical at the very least.
Sorry, beg to differ....
I've had a dog run out into my car, chasing a cat. Couldnt do anything about that. Had the same done when I was in the States many years ago. Had a Springbuck crash into the back of my vehicle when a herd got spooked. He got up, dazed, but managed to run off. The one in front, not so fortunate, broke it's hind legs.
They are all accidents.
Same with insects while I am driving. I dont swerve to hit them. I cant actually see them until they impact my vehicle. But it's highly probable that the impact kills them instantaneouly.
The ethical discussion here was about freezing insects. Some view it that we are potentially inflicting pain on it for our own pleasure (photography). Not killing it accidentally or killing it as we feel threatened (being stung/bitten)
That's not being hypocritical.
It is interesting that many people draw a line between birds & mammals and perhaps most other life forms in terms of which we treat humanely.
I remember perhaps the 3rd or 4th time I was in the States - Arches NP - and there were info-boards about the delicate plant life (lichen-like) which takes 10,000 years to grow (iirc) on the rocks, and requesting people be careful about where they walked to try not to imbalance the delicate ecosystem.
>99% of the people who read that, just charged off to see the arches, seeming to take no notice of the request.
Discussion is one way humans learn. We discuss, we listen, we may adjust our views and our ways. It doesnt have to be binary in the outcome. If we all improve our awareness of our environment and make effort to reduce our impact on it, then surely that's a good thing. Are we perfect? Nope, never will be, but trying to be better is surely a good quality.
Let me leave you with a final example.
Ler's say that if you placed an insect on a small metal plate which had a tiny current on it, you could make that insect jump or even fly. And if you had your camera trained on that plate, then when the insect got to it, you'd get the picture. The current is low enough to make it take the action (I'm ignoring how that was worked out), but not enough to kill it. Just a jolt, like when you get an electric shock
Is that ok ethically ?
What about if it was a dog? Still ok ?